Ground-mounted solar array at Mayfield, Linwood Road, Market Rasen

What was proposed

The application sought 10 ground-mounted solar panels and associated works to supply the adjacent dwelling.

“Site Description and Proposal: The application site comprises a small field adjacent to Mayfield, a detached house located to the south of Market Rasen and surrounded by open countryside.”

“The application seeks permission to install 10 ground mounted solar panels with associated works to supply the adjacent residential dwelling.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended permission because the scheme’s scale, siting and design would meet renewable-energy tests without significant harm.

“Support for the principle of renewable energy is found at national and local level. The acceptability principally rests on an assessment of the detailed impacts of such proposals. Policy S14 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan states that proposals for renewable energy schemes will be supported where the following tests have been met:”

“The proposal due to its size, scale, siting and design is considered to meet the 3 tests stated of Policy S14 of the Central Lincolnshire Local Plan (see following sections of this report on visual and residential amenity).”

Officer report

Nature and other impacts

A native tree and ecological measures would provide biodiversity enhancements, while highways and archaeology raised no reason to refuse permission.

“Whilst the proposed development is not subject to the Biodiversity Net Gain condition in law it is noted that the applicating is providing biodiversity enhancements by planting a native tree within the wider site.”

“Archaeology LCC Archaeology have stated that ‘The proposed development is located in an area of archaeological sensitivity, being located immediately south of an excavated area of relatively dense Roman archaeology. We note that the proposed development is small in scale with limited areas of ground disturbance outside of the previously disturbed footprint.”

Officer report

What consultees said

No representations were received from the chairman or ward members, parish or town council, or local residents; highways and flood authorities had no objections.

“Representations Chairman/Ward member(s): None received…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant was invited to address the committee but declined to speak.

What members discussed

A member said the application would normally be decided under delegated powers and proposed approval, which was seconded.

“During discussion, a Member of the Committee noted that the application would ordinarily be determined under delegated powers and proposed that the application be approved. This was seconded.”

Minutes

The committee vote

With no further debate, members voted on the proposal to accept the officer recommendation.

“There being no further debate, the proposal to accept the Officer’s recommendations was duly seconded and voted upon. It was therefore agreed that planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to conditions requiring an ecological mitigation plan, commencement within three years and compliance with the approved drawing.

“Conditions which apply or require matters to be agreed before the development commenced: No development shall take place until a written Ecological Mitigation & Enhancement Plan (EMEP) is submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.”

“Conditions which apply or are to be observed during the course of the development: With the exception of the detailed matters referred to by the conditions of this consent, the development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following drawing: RDS 11843 / 10 (C) dated December 2025. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and in any other approved documents forming part of the application.”

Minutes